ENGLISH-MAJORED STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF GRAMMARLY’S FEEDBACK IN PARAGRAPH WRITING

Luong Vo Nhat Quang, Lam Ky Nhan

Abstract


The growing use of artificial intelligence (AI)-powered writing assistants has transformed English writing instruction by providing learners with immediate and automated feedback. Among these tools, Grammarly has gained widespread popularity in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) contexts; however, limited research has explored English-majored students’ perceptions of its feedback in paragraph writing. This mixed-methods study investigated students’ perceptions of Grammarly’s usability, correction accuracy, impact on confidence and writing development, perceived strengths, and perceived limitations. Quantitative data were collected through a questionnaire administered to 123 English-majored students at Nam Can Tho University, while qualitative data were obtained from semi-structured interviews with ten students. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were employed to analyze the data. The findings indicated that participants held highly positive perceptions of Grammarly (overall M = 4.24). Students particularly valued its usability, immediate feedback, grammatical accuracy, and support for self-editing and autonomous learning. Interview findings further revealed that Grammarly enhanced learners’ confidence, reduced writing anxiety, and encouraged independent revision. Nevertheless, participants acknowledged that Grammarly was less effective in addressing higher-order writing concerns, including idea development, coherence, and organization, and emphasized that it could not replace teacher feedback. The study concludes that Grammarly is a valuable supplementary tool for EFL paragraph writing and is most effective when integrated with teacher guidance to support both linguistic accuracy and overall writing development.

Keywords


Grammarly, automated writing evaluation, AI-assisted writing, paragraph writing, English-majored students

Full Text:

PDF

References


Alharbi, M. (2019). Saudi Arabia EFL university students’ voice on challenges and solution in learning academic writing. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(3), 576–586. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v8i3.15276

Al-Khulaidi, M., & Abdulkhalek, M. (2022). Academic writing problems in L2 settings: Realities and need for intervention. Journal of English Studies in Arabia Felix, 1(1), 42–51. https://doi.org/10.56540/jesaf.v1i1.15

Amelia, R. (2020). Students’ perception on employing self-directed feedback in writing. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature, 5(1), 60–70. https://doi.org/10.33369/joall.v5i1.10151

Bhowmik, S. (2021). Writing instruction in an EFL context: Learning to write or writing to learn language? BELTA Journal, 5(1), 30–42. https://doi.org/10.36832/beltaj.2021.0501.03

Dewi, U. (2023). Grammarly as automated writing evaluation: Its effectiveness from EFL students’ perceptions. Lingua Cultura, 16(2), 155–161. https://doi.org/10.21512/lc.v16i2.8315

Fahmi, M., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2021). EFL students’ perception on the use of Grammarly and teacher feedback. JEES (Journal of English Educators Society), 6(1), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.21070/jees.v6i1.849

Fathi, J., Rahimi, M., & Liu, G. (2022). A preliminary study on flipping an English as a foreign language collaborative writing course with video clips: Its impact on writing skills and writing motivation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(2), 659–675. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12772

Gozali, I., Wijaya, A. R. T., Lie, A., Cahyono, B. Y., & Suryati, N. (2024). Leveraging the potential of ChatGPT as an automated writing evaluation (AWE) tool: Students’ feedback literacy development and AWE tools integration framework. The Jalt Call Journal, 20(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v20n1.1200

Hoang, G. T. L., & Van, K. T. G. (2025). Grammarly Feedback on EFL Learners’ Writing: Feedback Precision and Student Perceptions. EIKI Journal of Effective Teaching Methods, 3(2). https://journals.eikipub.com/index.php/jetm/article/view/469

Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667251

Jelita, K., Daud, A., & Masyhur, M. (2023). The effectiveness of using Grammarly on high school students’ writing quality. International Journal of Educational Best Practices, 7(1), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.31258/ijebp.v7n1.p43-55

Koltovskaia, S. (2020). Student engagement with automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) provided by Grammarly: A multiple case study. Assessing Writing, 44, 100450. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2020.100450

Lee, I. (2017). Classroom writing assessment and feedback in L2 school contexts. Springer. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-10-3924-9

Manchón, R. M. (2011). Writing to learn the language. Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language, 61-82. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.31.07man?locatt=mode:legacy

Mehta, S., & Al-Mahrooqi, R. (2014). Can thinking be taught? Linking critical thinking and writing in an EFL context. REL C Journal, 46(1), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688214555356

Myles, J. (2002). Second language writing and research: The writing process and error analysis in student texts. Tesl-ej, 6(2), 1-20.

O’Neill, R., & Russell, A. M. T. (2019). Stop! Grammar time: University students’ perceptions of the automated feedback program Grammarly. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3795

Prasetya, R. E., & Raharjo, D. H. (2023). Enhancing English language writing skills: An evaluation of the efficacy of Grammarly application. Journal of English Language Studies, 8(2), 320-338. https://doi.org/10.30870/jels.v8i2.19294

Ranalli, J., Link, S., & Chukharev-Hudilainen, E. (2017). Automated writing evaluation for formative assessment of second language writing: investigating the accuracy and usefulness of feedback as part of argument-based validation. Educational Psychology, 37(1), 8–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1136407

Reichelt, M. (2011). Foreign language writing: An overview. Foreign language writing instruction: Principles and practices, 3-21. Retrieved from https://books.google.ro/books/about/Foreign_Language_Writing_Instruction.html?id=wKoWEAAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y

Sengul, F., Bostancı, H., & Kurt, M. (2022). Online in-class vs. out-of-class flipped learning models in English as a foreign language writing classes. Frontiers in Psychology, 13,1009800. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1009800

Tambunan, A., Andayani, W., Sari, W., & Lubis, F. (2022). Investigating EFL students’ linguistic problems using Grammarly as automated writing evaluation feedback. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 16–27. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v12i1.46428

Thi, N., & Nikolov, M. (2021). How teacher and Grammarly feedback complement one another in Myanmar EFL students’ writing. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31(6), 767–779. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00625-2

Thongchalerm, S., & Jarunthawatchai, W. (2020). The impact of genre-based instruction on EFL learners’ writing development. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.1311a

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Wang, Z., & Han, F. (2022). The effects of teacher feedback and automated feedback on cognitive and psychological aspects of foreign language writing: A mixed-methods research. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.909802

Yang, Y. I. (2015). An investigation of Chinese junior high school teachers’ and students’ attitudes towards EFL writing. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 5(2), 59-75. Retrieved from https://consortiacademia.org/wp-content/uploads/IJRSE/IJRSE_v5i2/1209-4335-1-PB.pdf




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejoe.v11i2.6890

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright © 2016-2026. European Journal of Open Education and E-learning Studies (ISSN 2501-9120) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms.

All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).